20-25 is nothing to scoff at. That's easily a quarter of someone's whole life.
What exactly is the goal of keeping him in jail for more than 25 years then?
Resurrecting the dead?
Taking away the grief of an officer who killed an innocent man?
Teaching him a lesson that takes 25+ years to learn?
I don't see how you accomplish anything of benefit by doing so.
I'd agree if it was just the swatting, but.
Prosecutors say that in addition to initiating the swatting episode in Kansas — where he entered his plea on Tuesday — Mr. Barriss made dozens of other, similar calls to emergency and law enforcement agencies across the country during which he falsely reported bomb threats, active shootings and other criminal activity at high schools, shopping malls and even the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
i fail to see how that lesson is better learned in 25 years than, say, 5 or 10
The goal is keeping a sociopathic narcissist out of the way of the other people's lives. He murdered someone by proxy.
Then while you're at it, why not sentence him for life or give him the death penalty, if the point is to separate him from society and rehabilitation apparently isn't a factor?
He's certainly sociopathic and needs to be jailed. But what 25+ years in prison will do for him is unclear to me.
Out of the way for 25+ years? That's not really doing anyone any good. Nor is that justification for 25+ years. Like zukriuchen said, if that's the goal, why not give him, or anyone else who gets in the way of others, life?
I'm glad the officer was able to rebound if that's the case. He still ended an innocent man's life, and I'm sure that has added some quantifiable weight to his shoulders. Weight that doesn't need to be there in the first place.
I'm pretty sure the guys intention wasn't to kill someone. Just to have someone kick his door down. Obviously, to a clear thinking individual, there are consequences that you recognize are a possiblity from sending an armed squad of men into a house. But being the sociopathic narcissist this guy is, it's safe to say he probably wasn't clearly thinking it out to that degree.
he looks like a human lightbulb
he wasn't so bright after all
I'm sure murderers can "learn their lesson" in 1 year as well. Doesn't mean they shouldn't be in for longer.
What do you see as a person who's "learned their lesson"? Someone who's at low risk of re-offending? I don't think most murderers fall under that category. If one theoretically did, and provided no danger to society, would you keep them locked up longer for the sake of punishment?
Your logic means that someone who swatted someone once should get the same time as someone who did it 100 times. There are reasons besides learning your lesson that people are put away for that was my point.
Plus he had already been in jail:
Court records show that he called in bomb threats to high schools across the country in 2015. That October, Mr. Barriss was arrested and sentenced to two years in a California jail for a threat directed at a local ABC station in Glendale, Calif.
When he was released in August 2017, he slipped into the same pattern of behavior, the court documents say. Over a three-month period beginning in late September 2017, he made more than 30 swatting calls: He created fictional murder-suicide plots and schemes he tied to the Islamic State; forced evacuations at an Illinois high school and a Dallas convention center; and a day after the Las Vegas shooting that October, he called the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, pretending to be a man who had shot his wife in a hotel there and intended to do more harm.
Among his guilty pleas on Tuesday, Mr. Barriss also admitted that he had called in hoax bomb threats to the headquarters of the Federal Communications Commission — the day the agency voted to repeal net neutrality — and to the F.B.I.
I won't defend this guy but you need to be careful when you're talking about consequences that have some degree of randomness after the crime has already been committed. The justice system doesn't look at it this way but it's worth thinking about.
Let's say you have two people who are totally smashed and both of them try to drive home. One of them crashes into a tree and just gets a DUI, the other hits a family who are not wearing their seatbelts and they all die.
Technically both of them have the same level of wrongdoing, unless you feel that the outcome wasn't based on luck once they got in the car.
He doesn't care about life, he swatted people and made false reports knowing that the response would likely lead to a death due to the severity.
His actions and his false reports got someone innocent killed, 25 years is a solid plea-deal for essentially being accessory to murder/homicide.
Where did I say such a thing?
Just let the law professionals who actually have years of experience dealing criminal justice debate the sentence in the courtroom will ya?
I think people are allowed to have opinions on these matters. It doesn't change his sentence, but it gives people something to discuss.
Don't want to participate then don't.
his ass is going to be unrecognizable
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.